My Conclusion

Overall, i want to say that through my research i've learned that Hitler is smart/pragmatic, cultured, a vegetarian, religious to a certain extent, determined, a murderer, and EVIL.

Hitler gained control because of lucky circumstances (the people were tired of a failing Weimar Republic and a horrible president); Hitler was perseverant and never lost hope in his party even when it was the "butt of jokes"; he used lots and lots of manipulative propaganda; Hitler used legal tactics (such as Article 48); the nazi party was well organized and supported (he had lots of patronage); he traveled around the country in a private plane; he appeared strong and promised the people what they wanted; hitler got rid of his opponents by blaming the Communists for the Reichstag fire; he used nationalism to gain popular support; he took the blame off the germans by saying the war guilt clause was ridiculous; he killed those against him in the "Night of Long Knives;" he used the pre-existing anti-semitism to his advantage and found a common enemy for all germans to unite against; and finally he gained the support of the President and the Army when Hitler became President and therefore the army was forced to swear allegiance to him. 

Most of my research focused on how Hitler actually gained his power because for me that was the most interesting part about this guy. I understand how he kept his power- force, murderer, relentless torture and slaughter, etc... Granted the guy needed some brains in order to come to power and to correctly carry out his plan to destroy the Jewish race- but he was bloodthirsty never the less. I obviously have some strong emotions towards Adolf Hitler (as shown in a few earlier posts), but i do respect his manipulation skills. He was definitely more of a totalitarian dictator than Peter the Great or Napoleon- but i think we all knew that before. Everyone knew that Hitler was considered the first totalitarian dictator. We were just curious what aspects of totalitarianism were used in Peter and Napoleon's respective rules. Hitler had control over EVERYTHING through the use of FORCE and propaganda. 

BUT

i have NO doubts that HITLER was a

BRUTAL 

TOTALITARIAN

DICTATOR

IN GERMANY.

Peter the Great is not a totalitarian dictator like Hitler

This is a short post-

basically i'm just surprised by how Grace talks about how honest Peter the Great was. Well at least he did what he said he was going to do. Hitler was such a manipulator through his use of religion, military, words, propaganda, etc... I respect Peter the great for protecting his "reputation in history" as Grace puts it. I like that about a ruler- but is he a tyrant or a totalitarian dictator? In the sense that he had total control over all aspects yes- but for me when i think of a totalitarian dictator i don't think of a good person who wants to respect his own reputation- i think of a brutal manipulator: Hitler. For me, Peter the Great was a great ruler because he just changed the religious aspects he didn't like and he "imposed his authority instead of tricking the public" as Hitler did. The thing is, all this makes Peter the Great a great ruler and a great and POWERFUL man- but not a TOTALITARIAN MANIPULATING DICTATOR. Maybe this is just my opinion? who knows...

Holocaust Doesn't Unite Germans

Okay, yes hitler was one to demonstrate his power through all of the propaganda and FORCE that was used, but i have to disagree a little bit with Grace about how Hitler used the Holocaust "to unite the German people." Yes, since Hitler was legally voted into power- the majority of people were united by his powerful words promoting "CHANGE," but i'm not sure that the holocaust in of itself united the german people. Perhaps the Nazi's were united by the sheer grief and terror of having to kill so many people. But i remember from some article we read in class, that a lot of Nazi's questioned Hitler and questioned his reasoning for all this killing. Also, plenty of good germans hid Jews in their homes and a good number also didn't approve of the killing at all. But i think that the majority just had NO IDEA what was actually going on. Or at least they denied the fact that they had any clue whatsoever. Therefore the Holocaust didn't actually unite the German people in a positive light of "woo hoo hitler is awesome!" But the Holocaust actually united the german people and the jewish people through sheer terror.

Jealousy

I can see that zak- considering that there is no way that Hitler could've come to power had there not been an underlying feeling of anti-semitism. The Jews in Prussia had a lot of financial success- and when one group is extra productive- everyone else tends to get jealous and feel threatened (this would be the already established aristocracy). When Napoleon established this emancipation and gave the wealthy and already established Jews equal rights, the aristocracy got even angrier. So in reality, this anti-semitism in Prussia/Germany has its seeds in jealousy. I guess Hitler just played off of this jealousy of Jews when he was trying to gain and maintain power. With my previous post, i discovered that Hitler chose the Jews as his victims because he believed them to be the most logical and pragmatic choice. This obviously wouldn't have been possible had it not been for Napoleon's contribution when he was in charge of Prussia. 

All of these tyrannical leaders seem to be interconnected in one form or another.

Hitler, The Nobility, and Machiavelli

Hmm...Hitler and the nobility- well Grace, you are definitely right about Hitler not really having a persay "nobility" to deal with since Hitler was rising to power in the 20th century when social class divisions were much different. Don't forget that Hitler rose to power legally- but i'd say that in the beginning (PRIOR to his ascent to total power) he did not have the support of the big business or of the nobility. Hitler's primary supporters were from the lower classes and the peasantry. But in order to get a majority- you can't just have one group support you- you need some people from most every group. I mean, the majority of the 'nobility' really didn't like Hitler and viewed him as a demagogue. it doesn't seem like Hitler really respected the nobility or the elite intellectuals or the high members of the military either. My evidence for how Hitler didn't like any of these people that had different views than him was that on June 30th, 1934 "Hitler carried out a purge that took the lives of a number of dissident Nazi leaders and other opponents. The exact number of victims has never been determined, although it probably exceeded one hundred. Ernst Röhm, the SA leader, was among these victims. The influence of the SA now declined, while that of Himmler's SS, which provided the executioners for the purge, increased. Himmler also controlled the Gestapo, the secret police created by the Nazis." I don't think he ever promised the nobility anything like he promised the working class jobs, etc... (although he 1did help bring Germany out of the depression); Hitler never gave anything to the nobility like Peter the Great did with having to let the nobility play a role in the government. But once Hitler had total power, which can be explained in detail by looking at this post- through the use of Article 48- Hitler didn't have to give anyone anything because he could just use total force. Hitler had total power since he "abolished the office of president and assumed the president's powers. The members of the armed forces were now required to take an oath of allegiance to Hitler. This oath represented an important step in the establishment of Hitler's control over Germany's armed forces." (same website as before)

Grace- exactly like Machiavelli since Hitler did make the people fear and respect him- love him? Well, they certainly called him the Fuhrer and gave him lots of respect and attention. So i'd say he was pretty damn good at being Machiavellian. Unlike Peter the Great i guess. After Hitler took power- he controlled all the social classes practically- since he could use FORCE FORCE FORCE. In a previous post of mine, i compared Bismarck to Machiavelli- and now i am making the comparison between Hitler and Machiavelli.

Motivations for the Holocaust

As in my previous post, Cas asked the question as to what Hitler's motivations were for wanting to slaughter the jews. Through my research i came across a couple of very interesting quotes on the internet. Obviously, Hitler had some kind of personal connection with wanting to kill the jews- he genuinely believed that they were a lesser race and were subhuman. But it also seems that he chose the Jews, because it was the most practical and logical solution. In a sens, they were the best choice.
"With this very thing in mind I scanned the revolutionary events of history and put the question to myself against which racial element in Germany can I unleash my propaganda of hate with the greatest prospects of success? I had to find the right kind of victim, and especially one against whom the struggle would make sense, materially speaking. I can assure you that I examined every possible and thinkable solution to this problem, and, weighing every imaginable factor, I came to the conclusion that a campaign against the Jews would be as popular as it would be successful" (nizkor.org) My question is- why didn't Hitler work in a more positive light- why didn't he just focus on raising the german's spirits simply by telling them how great and strong they are. Why did he have to raise the german's spirits by lowering the Jew's spirits (or should i just say slaughtering the jews)? He had to find "the right kind of victim"- that sounds almost like a murderer scowering the city below for his perfect target. This clearly wasn't solely chosen by random, or by his own personal connection- but a combination of his personal feelings and by his pragmatic tyrannical feelings. Along with his pragmatic ideals, Hitler felt that the jews "are totally defenseless, and no one will stand up to protect them"- so therefore by attacking the Jews- it is a sure win (same website as before). That seems to be something always on Hitler's mind- his need to win win win.

Nationalist Hitler

Hitler plays to people’s love of their country and always references our country and us Germans. For example, this mother’s day card talks about how Hitler says, “We all have but one thing that really makes our lives worth living on this earth: That is our own people, which for us Germans is our Germany. We stand within this people. We live with this people and are bound to it in good times and bad. Our highest duty and holiest task is to preserve this people. For that goal, no sacrifice is too great.” To me, the words/phrases that pop into my head after reading this: NATION, NATIONALISM, COUNTRY PRIDE, COUNTRY LOVE, GERMANS ARE AWESOME, WE ARE AWESOME, LETS KILL THE ENEMY- THE JEWS AND ANYONE THAT SUPPORTS THEM! KILL KILL KILL!

Also, along the lines of Hitler using a strong sense of nationalism to gain the popular support- he used the Treaty of Versailles to help argue his point as well. Meaning- he talked about how horrible the Treaty was and therefore how they should fight back! As said here, "The Treaty of Versailles created economic conditions where Hitler's populist message could gain a hearing. The Allies forced a prostrate Germany, threatened by communist revolution from within, to accept full blame for the war." The cash reparation would've taken 50 years to pay off. Plus, when Germany's economy collapsed due to hyperinflation- everyone (including Hitler) blamed the Treaty. Overall, Hitler's nationalism gave hope to the common man. But the upper classes were fearful of Hitler- maybe because they detected "a genuine willingness to take risks" (same article).

"The answer is that Hitler called for European nationalism as a response to communism, liberalism and internationalism." 

The War Lord! The Manipulator!

Hitler is described as a war lord- therefore, if I’m thinking about why Hitler was such an effective dictator- one major reason was his war-lord powers to think ahead and destroy the enemy with no room for remorse. During World War II, Hitler as a human being disappeared, and he solely embodied “the historic figure of the Führer” (Hitler: A Study In Tyranny, 563). This historic figure is larger than life- Hitler became a man that no one questioned. They didn’t question his motivations, his decisions, or even his horrible actions- they respected him and followed him for as long as they could. If you remember, Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia had a pact- but Hitler never had any intention of keeping that pact. Hitler was very diplomatic (or manipulative) though- so it never looked like Hitler was the one backing out of the engagement: “By no treaty or pact,’ Hitler wrote, ‘can a lasting neutrality of Soviet Russia be insure with safety. At present all reasons speak against Russia’s departure from this state of neutrality. In eight months, one year, or several years this may be altered” (564). Basically, Hitler makes it seem that it is Soviet Russia that will back out of the agreement and therefore they must strike soon!
MANIPULATOR- that’s the conclusion I’ve come to. Hitler uses his words and his control over art and propaganda to manipulate his country and his people into doing things that they never imagined they would take part in. Hitler manipulated his country through propaganda. For Hitler, art “was linked with the country life, with health, and with the Aryan race. "We shall discover and encourage the artists who are able to impress upon the State of the German people the cultural stamp of the Germanic race . . . in their origin and in the picture which they present they are the expressions of the soul and the ideals of the community." (Hitler, Party Day speech, 1935; in Adam, 1992).” All of the art glorified the soldiers, Hitler himself, the German citizens, and Hitler’s ideals. “The painters used their art to depict Hitler as the healing element that would cure the country's ills. They also painted the common "Volk" (folk) in everyday settings. The art of this racially pure country was to overcome differences in class and mold all of the people into one ideal. When not painting pastoral scenes or glorifying the war, the artists would turn their paint brushes against the Jew, depicting him as inhuman and inferior.” For example- anti-Semitic artwork. 

Hitler and Religion

After seeing Grace's post about Peter the Great and religion, i thought about Hitler.

Hitler wasn't a practicing catholic, but he did believe in the Bible.
-"But through his political and religious reasoning he established in 1933, a German Reich Christian Church, uniting the Protestant churches to instill faith in a national German Christianity. Future generations should remember that Adolph Hitler could not have come into power without the support of the Protestant and Catholic churches and the German Christian populace."

He had faith and believed in God even if he did fight against certain catholic priests that disagreed with him politically. I still don't understand how a man could kill and still believe that this was God's will... According to this website Hitler said in Mein Kampf "Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord." I'm sorry but this just makes me angry

very

angry

ugh! "defending" yourself! HOW HOW HOW!!!!???? YOU ARE THE ONE MURDERING THEM! THEY AREN'T ATTACKING YOU! THIS ISN'T SELF DEFENSE! THIS IS SLAUGHTER- CRUEL, INHUMANE SLAUGHTER!

i personally am not religious- but no God would call the slaughter of jew's his work that needs to be done. at least no god that i would believe in. 

-"For when a people is not willing or able to fight for its existence-- Providence in its eternal justice has decreed that people's end." (Mein Kampf) I find this odd...i mean considering the jewish people were unable to truly fight for their existence because Hitler and the Nazi's made it impossible for them to fight back at all. if they fought back they were slaughtered. so therefore this "providence in its eternal justice" is more just like man's personal will and beliefs. One man- Hitler, with his support of course, was in charge of almost bringing the end to an entire race of people. how is this just at all?

Tactics to gain power

More about how Hitler came to power. So after his party won the majority in the elections and Hindenburg appointed Adolf Hitler as Chancellor legally in 1933, Hitler was sitting on a high horse because he was slowly but surely taking over Germany. Now all he had to do was "[bring] the powerful existing institutions over to his side" (Mein Kampf, p 95)- and the two main institutions would be the Army and the President.

- He obviously was gaining popular support:  membership grew from 389,000 at the beginning of 1931 to 800,000 by the end of that year. In this book Hitler: A study in Tyranny by Alan Bullock, Hitler was almost compared to a demagogue. Since he was very good at manipulating the army and the young Party. Therefore, since Hitler was so charismatic and talented at gaining popular support- the only thing for leaders to do (such as the French Military Attaché, Colonel Chapouilly) is to"use him and win him over" (page 190). I find that similar to kind of things you see in the movies- when someone is so powerful and the people truly respect and love- if you don't get on their side then you are bound to lose.

How did Hitler gain power? What tactics did he use? According to this website:

-the Nazi Party was well organised and had the support of Alfred Hugenberg. He was a millionaire who owned 53 newspapers. Hugenberg had begun to support Hitler in the 1920s. All of his newspapers backed Hitler. IE.. PATRONAGE
-Hitler hired a private plane to fly around Germany. He was the first politician to do this. When he landed he had two Mercedes cars to carry him from place to place. This meant that he could speak in many towns on the same day. IE.. SPEAKS EVERYWHERE
-Hitler told the German people that the problems of the Depression were not their fault. He blamed the Jews for Germany's problems. He used them as a scapegoat. Hitler said that he would be able to solve the problems and promised different things to different groups of people. To businessmen he promised that he would control the Trade Unions and deal with the Communists. To workers he promised that he would provide jobs. IE.. TAKES BLAME OFF THE GERMANS- no more GUILT, such as that which they got from the war guilt clause. PROMISES PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANT
-Hitler said that he would do away with the Treaty of Versailles, which had treated Germany so badly. Hitler was always backed up by large numbers of disciplined and uniformed followers - this made it appear that he was a man who could take decisions and sort out Germany's problems. I.E. HE APPEARED STRONG- a little machiavellian 
-On 27th February, just a week before the election, the Reichstag caught fire and burnt down. A communist, Franz van der Lubbe was arrested inside. Hitler used this as an excuse to arrest many members of the Communist Party, his main opponents. I.E. GET RID OF OPPONENTS BY BLAMING THEM FOR THE FIRE
- Finally on 30th June 1934 Hitler eliminated his opponents within the Nazi Party in the "Night of the Long Knives". 400 members of the Sturm Abteilung, the Brownshirts, and other people, who Hitler did not trust were murdered. I.E. GAIN POWER BY MURDERING ALL THOSE AGAINST HIM
-When President Hindenburg died in August 1934, Hitler was finally able to gain total power and combined the posts of chancellor and president, giving himself the title of Fuhrer. All members of the armed forces now had to swear an oath of loyalty to him. I.E. GAINED SUPPORT OF ARMY AND PRESIDENT SINCE HE BECAME PRESIDENT AND ARMY WAS FORCED TO SWEAR ALLEGIANCE TO HIM

More about Hitler.

Hitler wanted to "concentrate all power in his own hands" and to "re-establish the Nazi Party as a political organization which would seek power exclusively through constitutional means"(119). Hitler didn't want to use force or violence or stage a coup- he wanted to do this politically, legally, and properly- as a matter of fact- i kind of admire him for this, or at least respect his brilliance in this manner. To do something legally- even if by using Article 48 he kind of used the system to his own PERSONAL advantage- he was still being very very very smart. "If outvoting them (Catholics and Marxists) takes longer than outshooting them, at least the result will be guaranteed by their own constitution. Any lawful process is slow...Sooner or later we shall have a majority- and after that, Germany"(119).

how true is that statement?

very

scarily

true.

of course- then hitler started to threaten the state with violence even though he had promised good behavior. he shouted such things as "to this struggle of ours (the struggle against the enemy of the jews and marxists- i.e. the enemy) there are only two possible issues: either the enemy passes over our bodies or we pass over theirs!"(119). Such things as these got the government of Bavaria to forbid him from public speaking- so he was silenced for 2 years but he was still working on organizing the National Socialist German Worker's Party. His party grew from  27,000 in 1925 to 178,000 in 1929. THAT'S IMPRESSIVE! 

The Road to Power

So, as I

A)check the status of blogs and quickly realize that my group has failed YET ANOTHER WEEK to write anything on their subjects and

B)look at my Grandparent's bookshelf, i noticed this GIANT BOOK called the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany by William L. Shirer. Let me just repeat that this book is over 1,000 pages.

So i opened up the book to page 117, chapter 5, The Road to Power: 1925-31, which i figured would be helpful since i am trying to learn how Hitler came to power and managed to persuade the majority of the nation to VOTE away their democracy. I guess it is important to know the context for when Hitler started to come to power. So it appears that the years of 1925-1929, were "lean years for Adolf Hitler and the Nazi movement" but he persevered and never lost his hope or confidence even though he had a very excitable nature "which often led to outbursts of hysteria." During the years of 1925 and 1928, unemployment fell dramatically, wages rose, and the "lower middle classes, all the millions of shopkeepers and small-salaried folk on whom Hitler had to draw for his mass support, shared in the general prosperity" (117). So if the people are happy- i would either guess that it'd be easier for hitler to gain support since everyone is in a good mood OR and more likely, that the people don't want to listen to some politician advocating for a new way to live their lives, since their lives are going pretty well with all the money flowing in. 

During this period of time, "life seemed more free, more modern, more exciting" where the "intellectual life seemed so lively" (118). "Most Germans one met- politicians, writers, editors, artists, professors, students, businessmen, labor leaders- struck you as being democratic, liberal, even pacifist" (118). If this is the case, then how did this majority of Germans turn into the Nazis that violently killed millions. 

I love the writing of this book- "one scarcely heard of Hitler or the Nazis except as butt of jokes- usually in connection with the Beer Hall Putsch, as it came to be known" (118). So i guess at the beginning, if Hitler hadn't had perseverance- none of this would have happened. I mean, in the elections of May 20,1928- the Nazi party only polled 810,000 votes out of the total 31 million cast. It looks to me that Hitler didn't have it as easy as i might've guessed. I don't know- i guess i always have wondered how a totalitarian dictator like Adolf Hitler comes to power. I kind of just figured he TOOK IT. But not in Germany. Hitler was a the butt of jokes for a while- if anyone had made a joke about him to his face in 1940 he or she would've been slaughtered. 

Women before the French Revolution

Okay, so i'm not going to the dawn of time with this blog post/research...

Italian Renaissance: Denigration of women

- Alberti's On the Family (1443) talked about how women were consigned to purely domestic roles, asserting that "man is by nature more energetic and industrious" and that woman was created "to increase and ocnintue generations, and to nourish and preserve those already born"

- Castiglione: The Book of the Courtier (1528) talked about how court ladies could be "gracious entertainers" [all quotations taken from Coffin]

- at this point in time the exemplar of female holiness: THE CELIBATE NUN

Protestant Reformation: by the 16th century, the unmarried women were considered more sexually driven and were considered a disturbance to the "natural" order of the world (where women are supposed to be subservient and subordinate to men) --> these unmarried women chose to either go to brothels or go to convents and become nuns. But the problem was that these single women DID NOT fit with the protestant model of the FAMILY as a unit for propagating the species, new believers, and as a place to provide discipline for the uncontrollable urges. So the Protestants BANNED convents (because they upset the natural order of marriage) and Brothels because they caused chaos.

- the Protestants also took autonomy away from women by closing down any source of community such as women only communities or places to discuss religious issues in public

- the protestants viewed women as spiritually equal, but socially subordinate

- protestants viewed marriage as IDEAL- parents have control over kid's marriage and it is tightly regulated by the state/church

- exemplar of female holiness: "goodwife" 

Counter Reformation:  cloistered the nunneries and basically shut them off from the rest of the world, but women were allowed to be celibate

- new emphasis brought upon importance of religious women--> new orders of nuns create such as the Ursulines and the Sisters of Charity

[1600's: DON'T FORGET THE WITCH HUNTS- women were clearly not trusted and not given a chance to explain themselves- instead they were just murdered because of the possibility of witchcraft. ]

THEN in the late 18th century (the Enlightenment):

- women were being viewed as companions and as friends to their husbands instead of objects; women's property was protected and more bourgeois women were being educated. Basically, the enlightenment was an age of intellectual independence and freedom from old customs and traditions. This period was all about the strength of the individual- even the individual woman. A couple of fantastic women came along by the names of Mary Wollstonecraft and Olympe de Gouges who argued for equality of the sexes with their respective pieces The Vindication of the Rights of Woman and The Rights of Woman.

- Wollstonecraft believed that natural rights were universal and therefore she argued for political and economic EQUALITY; she wanted women to have equal education so therefore she could complete her duty of educating her own children, to be an equal partner with her husband, and to be recognized as a create of reason.

- It was also believed at this time for women to remain chaste and to "put duty over their sexual pleasure"

After that...it's the French Revolution....

the vegetarian

really quickly- i'll read this link on hitler at a later time- but a couple things that popped out to me were:

Hitler was a VEGETARIAN? whatttt???
"He could not bear to eat meat, because it meant the death of a living creature. He refused to have so much as a rabbit or a trout sacrificed to provide his food. He would allow only eggs on his table, because egg laying meant that the hen had been spared rather than killed."
- how could hitler feel that eating meat was bad because it was the death of a living creature- are animals better than human beings? that blows my mind

"He believed deeply in God. He called God the Almighty, master of all that is known and unknown."
- that is strange to me as well because how could hitler believe that what he was doing was something that God would approve of.
maybe i just think hitler is too horrible for any sort of justification.

although, apparently hitler was a recluse ("throughout the years of his youth, Hitler lived the life of a virtual recluse. He greatest wish was to withdraw from the world. At heart a loner, he wandered about, ate meager meals, but devoured the books of three public libraries. He abstained from conversations and had few friends"), which i find strange, especially since he became Germany's father figure and the person in the limelight. what kind of recluse likes that much attention? He also had a love for music, art, philosophy, books, etc... so i guess hitler was cultured as well? and smart?

so if this guy was religious, vegetarian, smart, cultured, and a bit of a loner- what drove him and enabled him to gain so much power and do so many horribly violent things?